1. Introduction

2. Materials and Methods

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. How prepared are the actors in the guinea pig value chain for the management of sustainable rural development projects?

The actors in the guinea pig value chain agree that project work is the way to progress and advance development. They went on a modest productive technical journey and have been incorporating the CFS-RAI principles [8,20] in their route towards sustainable local development. We explore, from the three dimensions of the WWP [62], the development of the human capital of the actors in the management of sustainable rural development projects in Jauja.

3.1.1. Ethical-social dimension

The historical background reveals a constant educational disadvantage for the rural Peruvian population [92] and Jauja is no exception. Poor basic education and scarce technical education do not favour rural development. In this context of rural life and family agriculture, residents have raised guinea pigs for their food security, and with the growth in demand [17] and technological improvements [13] some projects and training have been developed to promote the guinea pig value chain, which, added to the application of the CFS-RAI principles [20], is contributing to sustainable local development. This experience has encouraged the actors to develop project management skills to a moderate level (Table 2).

Within the IPMA competency assessment, actors, especially organized ones, show greater mastery of personal competencies (Table 2), specifically in the following competency elements: integrity and personal reliability, personal communication, relationships and participation, leadership and teamwork. Apparently, community values, inherited from ancestors, and the influence of academia and service providers (NGOs) support this progress and it is necessary to maintain and consolidate it with more training. It should be noted that the application of the WWP model when working with some of the actors [8,20] has proven to be a powerful tool for building strong values groups.

Project management competencies contribute to the strengthening of institutional capacities, given their intimate relationship (Table 3), and both are fundamental for the optimal development of organizations or actors, which when integrated into a LAG are the key elements for good governance [64], the social sustainability of value chains and the comprehensive development of territories. One of the benefits of any strong organization is the opportunity for disadvantaged people to empower themselves and improve their bargaining power and benefits within the chain. The institutional capacities of the actors in the guinea pig value chain in Jauja are developing (Figure 3, Table 4), and although they still exhibit insufficiently strong organizational performance (Table 5), which requires more training, the participation of a greater number of members (Table 3) and the influence of the LAG are improving these capacities based on the interrelationship between actors and the decision-making derived from social learning [20], which motivates them to be able to integrate an organization of the linked guinea pig value chain to the LAG (Table 6). In this regard, the increase in female participation in organizations and the emergence of nine women's organizations (Table 1) are having a positive impact on sustainable rural development, given their communication and collaboration skills [93]. This effect is beneficial not only because women face inequality, violence [94] and other barriers to leading organizations [95], which even lead to cultural patterns of male domination [96], but because by showing leadership, good interpersonal relationships and values, they have contributed to the well-being of the members and sustainable rural development [97]. This does not mean that the female gender should predominate, but that the best thing is the complementarity of both genders [98], given their different nature and characteristics.

Figure 4. Institutional capacities in actors of the guinea pig value chain, in Jauja.

Figure 4. Institutional capacities in actors of the guinea pig value chain, in Jauja.

In the development of the actors in the Jauja guinea pig value chain, the election of leaders with great social sensitivity has been encouraged at the producer level, and some of them are managing to unite their groups based on trust, institutional values and good governance. These actors are made up of proactive, persevering, dynamic and community-oriented people (Table 6), characteristics that must be maintained and fostered with favourable environments because they are favouring organizational development (Table 7). Likewise, good relations with other actors are also being improved, since sustainable territorial development needs to promote the difficult task of proactively articulating the actors [11,99] of the different value chains between value chains and other sectors that involve interest groups. In other words, the social innovation that has been generated from the application of the WWP model [62] is improving the institutional capacities of producers, which will gradually enhance the territorial governance and sustainable development of Jauja. However, to continue this progress, it is imperative to promote the training of actors, taking into consideration ethical-social aspects that internally strengthen organizations and improve their management.

The collective behaviour of the actors has important emotional support that leads them to be proactive and dynamic (Table 6) to achieve their objectives, but it requires better preparation to face risks (Table 7). It is important to nurture this emotional behaviour to promote learning processes [100], which has resulted in the training of entrepreneurs [101]. Likewise, it is also important to train leaders who promote cohesion and collectively empower the organization [102], to promote links with other actors and thus take advantage of opportunities to develop projects [103].

3.1.2. Technical-entrepreneurial dimension

The area of practice competencies corresponds to the technical-business dimension and is the least developed in the actors of the Jauja guinea pig value chain (Table 2); it is also observed that the capabilities regarding professional skills and the relevance of the activities are poorly developed (Figure 3). In this regard, service providers, which include NGOs, show a better level of competencies than other actors (Table 2), and in terms of institutional capacities, service providers, academia and local governments stand out, favoured by the professional training of their members. Likewise, it has also been observed that years of experience favourably influence the capabilities (Table 4) and the organizational management performance of the actors (Table 5). These results are justified because the majority of the projects developed in Jauja were prepared and executed by technicians from NGOs and academic entities under a top-down approach and with limited participation of the actors, a fact that did not facilitate the development of competencies in the actors and had repercussions in terms of their poor performance (Table 5).

For some years now, the RDC El Mantaro of the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos (UNMSM) has been working with some of its research groups on the development of projects, promoting greater involvement and protagonism of the LAG actors with a bottom-up focus, as well as incorporating CFS-RAI Principles into solutions to their local problems [20]. This experience favours the development of some technical skills in the participating actors. However, the process of developing a project management team in the Jauja actors will need to cover gaps in competency training (Table 2) and constant support from UNMSM technicians until satisfactory mastery of the competencies and autonomy of these management teams is achieved. It is important to mention that in the training process, the learning styles [104], the interests and the motivations of the actors are recognized, and holistic learning methods are incorporated [105], with emphasis on vicarious or experiential learning (Table 6 and Table 7) and practical activities, typical of the andragogy applied to the learning of adults residing in rural areas [106].

The competencies of the IPMA practice area are oriented towards economic development, with efficient use of resources, mainly endogenous [107], to obtain products and services that allow income to be earned. Although these competencies incorporate some elements of sustainability, the implementation of the CFS-RAI Principles contributes more effectively to strengthening the sustainability approach in the development of competencies, by incorporating social and environmental components that lead to authentic sustainability [108].

In the guinea pig value chain in Jauja, it can be seen that the technical productive aspect is more developed than the commercial one (Table 6); however, the actors suggest increasing the productive efficiency, marketing channels, quality and variety of the products (Table 7), which suggests continuing efforts in R&D&I projects with the support of universities, prioritizing productive and commercial management, and continuing to expand the implementation of the CFS-RAI Principles [8] until comprehensive sustainability is consolidated.

3.1.3. Political-contextual dimension

Accessibility to media within rural territory is decisive for accessing training services [109], and education is essential for the development of human capital in rural areas [110]. In Jauja, actors located on the left and right banks of the Mantaro river have better access and show better competencies (Table 2) and institutional capacities (Table 4). On the other hand, the performance of actors in organizational management is still low, mainly in producers (Table 5), which is attributed to their fewer training opportunities due to various factors that mainly affect young people [111]. For this reason, interventions need to equalize these access inequalities, possibly with communicative technological innovation, to improve results, especially in the formation of rural human capital.

Guinea pig farming has been promoted by the central government of Peru and several regional and municipal governments as a strategy to improve food security and reverse child malnutrition, and as a business opportunity to improve the poverty situation in rural areas. Although there is interest from the public administration in providing social support through projects, competition and poor coordination between actors occur [11,99] that dilute the efforts. Furthermore, these initiatives prioritize technical training, and the results are limited. To date, sustained economic growth and the consequent improvement in salaries has significantly improved poverty indicators in Peru [112], so it is recommended that organized and empowered actors influence public administration to invest in training in human capital competencies as a strategy to improve local economic growth, given that it has been shown to contribute to sustainable economic growth and reduce poverty [112].

The way in which the guinea pig value chain has been gaining recognition in the Jauja territory is through its organized and empowered actors. Progress is moderate, given the level shown by the actors in the area of competencies of the IPMA perspective (Table 4), and at a lower level for institutional capacities, specifically in relationships (Figure 3, Table 5). Linking the actors of the guinea pig value chain with the LAG is a good strategy to achieve closeness and dialogue with political actors, whose decisions can provide favourable conditions to continue developing the chain. There remains important training work in the competencies of the IPMA perspective and in the institutional capacities for linking with other actors in the territory so that the actors promote good governance and establish favourable conditions for development projects.

4. Conclusions

References

1. Fedele, G.; Donatti, C. I.; Bornacelly, I.; Hople, D. G. Nature-dependent people: Mapping human direct use of nature for basic needs across the tropics. Global Environmental Change 2021, 71, 102368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
2. Thacker, S.; Adshead, D.; Fay, M.; Hallegatte, S.; Harvey, M.; Meller, H.; O´Reagan, N.; Rozenberg, J.; Watkins, G.; Hall, J. W. Infrastructure for sustainable development. Nature Sustainability 2019, 2, 324–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3. Salemink, K.; Strijker, D.; Bosworth, G. Rural development in the digital age: A systematic literature review on unequal ICT availability, adoption, and use in rural areas. Journal of Rural Studies 2017, 54, 360–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
4. Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática. Pobreza monetaria alcanzó al 30.1% de la población del país durante el año 2020. Nota de prensa N° 067. 2021. Available online: https://www.inei.gob.pe/media/MenuRecursivo/noticias/np_067_2021.pdf (accessed on 4 January 2023).
5. López, I. Sobre el desarrollo sostenible y la sostenibilidad: conceptualización y crítica. Revista Castellano-Manchega de Ciencias Sociales 2015, 20, 111–128. [Google Scholar]
6. Cantú, J. B.; Fenner, G. M. San Cristóbal de las Casas: Las consecuencias ambientales de un crecimiento ambicioso y descontrolado. Diversidad 2020, 18, 109–122. [Google Scholar]
7. Giovannoni, E.; Fabietti, G. What Is Sustainability? A Review of the Concept and Its Applications. In Integrating Reporting, Busco, C., Frigo, M., Riccaboni, A., Quattrone, P., Eds; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2013; pp. 21–40. [Google Scholar]
8. Jiménez, R.; De los Ríos, I.; Huamán, A. The CFS-IRA principles as instruments for the management of rural development projects. The case of the central highlands of Perú. In Proceedings from the XXVI International Congress of Project Management and Engineering, Terrassa, España, 5-8 July 2022; pp. 1632-1644.
9. Scrimshaw, N. Malnutrition, brain development, learning and behavior. Nutrition Research 1998, 18, 351–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
10. Sánchez, A.; Migraciones internas en el Perú. Organización Internacional para las Migraciones: Lima, Perú. 2015. Available online: https://repository.iom.int/bitstream/handle/20.500.11788/1490/PER-OIM_009.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed on 4 January 2023).
11. Trivelli, C.; Escobal, J.; Revesz, B.; Desarrollo Rural en la Sierra. Aportes para el Debate. CIPCA, GRADE, IEP, CIES. Lima. 2009. Available online: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-51460-4 (accessed on 5 January 2023).
12. Municipalidad Provincial de Jauja. Plan de Desarrollo Local Concertado 2019–2030. 2019. Available online: http://www.munijauja.gob.pe/files/abe852a810334063afa7fb29343997d7.pdf (accessed on 14 December 2022).
13. Jiménez, R.; Huamán, A. Manual para el manejo de reproductores híbridos especializados en producción de carne. INCAGRO-ACRICUCEN-UNMSM: El Mantaro, Perú, 2020; 175 p.
14. Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática. Resultados Definitivos de los Censos Nacionales 2017. Available online: https://www.inei.gob.pe/media/MenuRecursivo/publicaciones_digitales/Est/Lib1576/ (accessed on 12 January 2023).
15. Chauca, L. Producción de cuyes (Cavia porcellus). Estudio FAO: producción y sanidad animal, 138. FAO: Roma, Italy, 1997; 80 p.
16. Aliaga, L.; Moncayo, R.; Rico, E.; Caycedo, A. Producción de cuyes. Fondo Editorial de la Universidad Católica Sedes Sapientiae: Lima, 2009; 808 p.
17. Chirinos, O.; Muro, K. , Álvaro Concha, W., Otiniano, J., Quezada, J. C., & Ríos, V. Crianza y comercialización de cuy para el mercado limeño; ESAN: Lima, 2008; 187 p.
18. Menconi, M. E.; Grohmann, D.; Mancinelli, C. European farmers and participatory rural appraisal: A systematic literature review on experiences to optimize rural development. Land Use Policy 2017, 60, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
19. Jiménez, R.; De los Ríos, I.; San Martín, F.; Calle, S. Creation of Local Action Groups for rural development in Peru: Perspectives from the CDR El Mantaro, UNMSM. In Proceedings of the XXV International Congress of Project Management and Engineering, Alcoy, Spain, 6–9 July 2021; pp. 1862–1875. [Google Scholar]
20. Jiménez, R.; De los Ríos-Carmenado, I.; San Martín, F.; Calle, S.; Huamán, A. Integration of the Principles of Responsible Investment in Agriculture and Food Systems CFS-RAI from the Local Action Groups: Towards a Model of Sustainable Rural Development in Jauja, Peru. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
21. Vercher, N. The role of Actors in Social Innovation in Rural Areas. Land 2022, 11, 710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
22. Winter, M.; Szczepanek, T. Projects and Programmes as value creation processes: A new perspective and some practical implications. International Journal of Project Management 2008, 26, 95–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
23. Cazorla-Montero, A.; De los Ríos-Carmenado, I.; Díaz-Puente, J.M. The LEADER community initiative as rural development model: Application in the capital region of Spain. Agrociencia 2005, 39, 697–708. Available online: https://www.agrociencia-colpos.mx/index.php/agrociencia/article/view/434/434 (accessed on 04 January 2023).
24. Rochedy, L.; Salvo, M. Viabilidad de la metodología LEADER para la gestión del desarrollo rural en Perú. In Proceedings from the XIV International Congress on Project Engineering, Madrid, AEIPRO, 2010; pp. 1891-1905.
25. Navarro, F. A.; Cejudo, E.; Cañete, J. A. A long-run analysis of neoendogenous rural development policies: The persistence of business created with the support of leader and proder in three districts of Andalucia (Spain) in the 1990s. Ager 2018, 25, 189–219. [Google Scholar]
26. De los Ríos-Carmenado, I.; Díaz-Puente, J.M.; Cadena-Iñiguez, J. The LEADER initiative as a model of rural development: Application to some territories of Mexico. Agrociencia 2011, 45, 609–624, Available online: http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?pid=S1405- 31952011000500007&script=sci_arttext (accessed on 22 January 2022). [Google Scholar]
27. Stratta, R.; De los Ríos, I.; López, M. Developing Competencies for Rural Development Project Management through Local Action Groups: The Punta Indio (Argentina) Experience. In International Development; Appiah-Opoku, S., Ed.; Intech Open: London, UK, 2017; pp. 153–172. [Google Scholar]
28. Quispe, A. ; La necesidad de formación de capacidades para la gestión del desarrollo rural territorial. Región y Sociedad 2006, 18, 36. [Google Scholar]
29. Ivey, J. L.; Smithers, J.; De Loë, R. C.; Kreutzwiser, R. D. Community Capacity for Adaptation to Climate-Induced Water Shortages: Linking Institutional Complexity and Local Actors. Environmental Management 2004, 33, 36–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
30. Leal, M.S. Competencias blandas en los gerentes de proyectos de las organizaciones. RES NON VERBA REVISTA CIENTÍFICA 2020, 10, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
31. Copola, F.; Aparecida, D.; Leme, A. The role and characteristics of hybrid approaches to project management in the development of technology-based products and services. Project Management Journal 2021, 52, 90–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
32. Rosas, A. Una ruta metodológica para evaluar la capacidad institucional. Política y cultura 2008, 30, 119–134. [Google Scholar]
33. [IPMA] Asociación Española en Dirección e Ingeniería de Proyectos. Bases para la competencia individual en Dirección de Proyectos, Programas y Carteras de Proyectos. IPMA: Valencia, España, 2017, 428 p. Available online: https://ipmamexico.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/ICB4.pdf (accessed on 06 January 2023).
34. Diez-Silva H., M.; Pérez-Ezcurdia, M. A.; Gimena, F. N.; Montes-Guerra, M. I. Medición del desempeño y éxito en la dirección de proyectos. Perspectiva del manager público. Revista EAN 2012, 73, 60–79. Available online: http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0120-81602012000200005 (accessed on 06 January 2023). [CrossRef]
35. Randhawa, K.; West, J.; Skellern, K.; Josserand, E. Evolving a value chain to an open innovation ecosystem: Cognitive engagement of stakeholders in customizing medical implants. California Management Review 2021, 63, 101–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
36. Sousa, J.; Soares, I. Benefits and barriers concerning demand response stakeholder value chain: A systematic literature review. Energy 2023, 280, 128065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
37. De Moura, G. B.; Saroli, L. G. Sustainable value chain management based on dynamic capabilities in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The International Journal of Logistics Management 2021, 32, 168–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
38. Lammers, P. J.; Carlson, S. L.; Zdorkowski, G. A.; Honeyman, M. S. Reducing food insecurity in developing countries through meat production: the potential of the guinea pig (Cavia porcellus). Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 2009, 24, 155–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
39. Jiménez, R. Uso de insumos agrícolas locales en la alimentación de cuyes en valles interandinos. Archivos Latinoamericanos de Producción Animal 2007, 15(Supl. 1), 229–232. [Google Scholar]
40. Díaz, A. F. Evaluación de la producción y comercialización de cuyes en el marco del proyecto Procuy en el distrito de El Mantaro-Jauja. Tesis de Ingeniero Zootecnista. Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú, Huancayo, Perú, 2014.
41. Rodriguez, T. L. Analisis situacional y prospective de pequeños productores de cuyes asociados del valle del Mantaro. Máster. Sci Thesis, Universidad Agraria La Molina, Lima, Perú, 2022. [Google Scholar]
42. Escobal, J.; Ponce, C.; Hernández Asensio, R. Límites a la articulación a mercados dinámicos en entornos de creciente vulnerabilidad ambiental: el caso de la dinámica territorial rural en la Sierra de Jauja, Junín. Documento de Trabajo N° 69. Programa Dinámicas Territoriales Rurales. Rimisp: Santiago, Chile, 2011.
43. Aliaga, H. Organización de la cadena productiva del cuy en el valle del Mantaro proyectado al mercado nacional e internacional. Tesis de Doctor en Administración de Negocios Globales. Universidad Ricardo Palma, Lima, Perú, 2016.
44. Espinoza, D.; Salina, M. F. Eficiencia en la gestión empresarial de las asociaciones de mujeres productoras de cuy, provincia de Jauja, período 2014-2015. Tesis de Economista. Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú, Huancayo, Perú, 2016.
45. Ahumada, J. L.; Cheng, D. G.; Mantilla, A. A. Desarrollo del mercado de carne de cuy en Lima Metropolitana. Tesis de Bachiller en Agronegocios. Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas, Lima, Perú, 2016.
46. Valenzuela, R. N.; Valdez, W. P. Fuentes de financiamiento del estado para organizaciones de productores agropecuarios en el Perú. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar 2021, 5. [Google Scholar]
47. Huamán, A. Informe final de proyecto: Innovación en el enfoque de competencias para la formación de técnicos extensionistas en producción de cuyes. UNMSM-INCAGRO: Jauja, Perú. 2010.
48. Müller, R. , & Turner, J. R. Matching the project manager’s leadership style to project type. International Journal of Project Management 2007, 25, 21–32. [Google Scholar]
49. Padilla, W. F.; Pino, R. M.; Amaya, A. A. Factores que impactan en los criterios de éxito de los proyectos en Perú y Ecuador: el rol moderador de las competencias del director de proyecto. Información tecnológica 2021, 32, 133–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
50. Suhonen, M.; Paasivaara, L. Shared Human Capital in Project Management: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Project Management Journal 2011, 42, 4–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
51. Brown, A. W.; Adams, J. D.; Amjad, A. A. The relationship between human capital and time performance in project management: A path analysis. International Journal of Project Management 2007, 25, 77–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
52. Silvius, A. J. G.; Schipper, R. P. J. Sustainability in project management: A literature review and impact analysis. Social Business 2014, 4, 63–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
53. Foley, J. A.; DeFries, R.; Asner, G. P.; Barford, C.; Bonan, G.; Carpenter, S. R.; Chapin, F. S.; Coe, M. T.; Daily, G. C.; Gibbs, H. K.; Helkowski, J. H.; Holloway, T.; Howard, E. A.; Kucharik, C. J.; Monfreda, C.; Patz, J. A.; Prentice, I. C.; Ramankutty, N; Snyder, P. K. Global consequences of land use. Science 2005, 309, 570–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
54. Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture and Food Systems. Committee on World Food Security. 2014. Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/au866e/au866e.pdf (accessed on 13 January 2023).
55. United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
56. Barrow, C. J. Sustainable development: concept, value and practice. Third World Planning Review 1995, 17, 369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
57. Rodríguez-Pose, A. , & Hardy, D. Addressing poverty and inequality in the rural economy from a global perspective. Applied Geography 2015, 61, 11–23. [Google Scholar]
58. Schafft, K. A. Rural Education As Rural Development: Understanding the Rural School-Community Well-Being Linkage in a 21st-Century Policy Context. Peabody Journal of Education 2016, 91, 137–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
59. Hoffmann, R.; Hoffmann, N. The Leader Programme as an Impulse for New Projects in Rural Areas. Quaestiones Geographicae 2018, 37, 141–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
60. Navarro-Valverde, F.; Labianca, M.; Cejudo-García, E.; De Rubertis, S. Social Innovation in Rural Areas of the European Union Learnings from Neo-Endogenous Development Projects in Italy and Spain. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
61. Serrano, J. J.; Esparcia, J. Diagnosis of Rural Development Processes Based on the Stock of Social Capital and Social Networks: Approach from E-I Index. Land 2023, 12, 850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
62. Cazorla, A.; De los Ríos, I.; Salvo, M. Working with People (WWP) in rural development projects: A proposal from social learning. Cuad. Desarro. Rural 2013, 10, 131–157. [Google Scholar]
63. Cazorla-Montero, A.; De los Ríos-Carmenado, I. From “Putting the Last First” to “Working with People” in Rural Development Planning: A Bibliometric Analysis of 50 Years of Research. Sustainability 2023, 15, 10117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
64. Scott, M. Building institutional capacity in rural Northern Ireland: the role of partnership governance in the LEADER II programme. Journal of Rural Studies 2004, 20, 49–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
65. Mancini, M. C.; Arfini, F.; Guareschi, M. When Higher Education Meets Sustainable Development of Rural Areas: Lessons Learned from a Community–University Partnership. Social Sciences 2022, 11, 338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
66. Zlatkin-Troitschanskaiaa, O.; Shavelsonb, R. J.; Kuhn, C. The international state of research on measurement of competency in higher education. Studies in Higher Education 2015, 40, 393–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
67. Bueno, G. F. Observaciones al enfoque por competencias y su relación con la calidad educativa. Sophia, colección de Filosofía de la Educación 2022, 32, 93–117. [Google Scholar]
68. Jamil, R. What is wrong with competency research? Two propositions. Asian Social Science 2015, 11, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
69. De los Ríos, I.; Turek, A.; Afonso, A. Project management competencies for regional development in Romania: analysis from “Working with People” model. Procedia Economics and Finance 2014, 8, 614–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
70. van den Beemt, A.; Vázquez-Villegas, P.; Gómez Puente, S.; O’Riordan, F.; Gormley, C.; Chiang, F.-K.; Leng, C.; Caratozzolo, P.; Zavala, G.; Membrillo-Hernández, J. Taking the Challenge: An Exploratory Study of the Challenge-Based Learning Context in Higher Education Institutions across Three Different Continents. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
71. [SIDA] Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency. The Octagon-A tool for the assessment of strengths and weaknesses in NGOs. Estocolmo, Suecia: SIDA. 2002. Available online: https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/pdf/the-octagon_1742.pdf/ (accessed on 10 January 2023).
72. Rosas, A. Capacidad institucional: revisión del concepto y ejes de análisis. Documentos y Aportes en Administración Pública y Gestión Estatal: DAAPGE 2019, 19, 81–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
73. Solano, D. Desarrollo, sostenibilidad y capacidades: una trilogia indesligable. Cuadernos de Difusión 2007, 12, 9–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
74. Tobelem, A. Institutional capacity analysis and development system (ICADS). Public Sector Management Division, Technical Department Latin America and the Caribbean Region of the World Bank. LATPS Occasional Paper Series N° 9, 1992.
75. Oszlak, O.; Orellana, E. El análisis de la capacidad institucional: aplicación de la metodología SADCI. Documento de trabajo, 2001.
76. Hyder, A.A.; Zafar, W.; Ali, J.; Ssekubugu, R.; Ndebele, P.; Kass, N. Evaluating institutional capacity for research ethics in Africa: a case study from Botswana. BMC Med Ethics 2013, 14, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
77. Apaza, S.; , Mamani, E. A. Formulación de un plan estratégico institucional, para el fortalecimiento de la fundación TEKO KAVI. Tesis de Licenciado en Administración de Empresas, Universidad Mayor de San Andrés, Bolivia, 2018. Available online: https://repositorio.umsa.bo/handle/123456789/22418 (accessed on 12 January 2023).
78. Deutsch-Feldman, M.; Ali, J.; Kass, N.; Phaladze, N.; Michelo, C.; Sewankambo, N.; Hyder, A. A. Improving institutional research ethics capacity assessments: lessons from sub-Saharan Africa. Global Bioethics 2020, 31, 120–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
79. Arenilla, M. Innovación social y capacidad institucional en Latinoamérica. Revista del CLAD Reforma y Democracia 2017, 67, 33–68. [Google Scholar]
80. Barbier, E.B.; Burgess, J.C. Institutional Quality, Governance and Progress towards the SDGs. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
81. Rivas, R. R. Impacto del asesoramiento técnico y organizativo en los sistemas de producción de la asociación de mujeres productoras de Yauli-Jauja. Tesis de Magister Scientiae, Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú, Huancayo, Perú, 2016.
82. Provincia de Jauja. Wikipedia. Available online: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provincia_de_Jauja (accessed on 2 April 2023).
83. Likert, R. A. Technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch. Psychol 1932, 22, 3–55. [Google Scholar]
84. Cronbach, L. J. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of test. Psychometrika 1951, 16, 297–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
85. Rivera, J. El aprendizaje significativo y la evaluación de los aprendizajes. Investigación educativa 2004, 8, 47–52. [Google Scholar]
86. Garcés, L. F.; Montaluisa, Á.; Salas, E. El aprendizaje significativo y su relación con los estilos de aprendizaje. Revista Anales 2018, 1, 231–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
87. Romero, M. El aprendizaje experiencial y las nuevas demandas formativas. Antropología Experimental 2010, 10, 89–102. [Google Scholar]
88. Espinar, E. M.; Vigueras, J. A. El aprendizaje experiencial y su impacto en la educación actual. Revista Cubana de Educación Superior 2020, 39. [Google Scholar]
89. Ferreira, D. C. El modelo Canvas en la formulación de proyectos. Cooperativismo & desarrollo 2015, 23. [Google Scholar]
90. Sparviero, S. The case for a socially oriented business model canvas: The social enterprise model canvas. Journal of social entrepreneurship 2019, 10, 232–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
91. Lozano. L.; Caicedo, J.; Fernández T., Onofre, R. El modelo de negocio: metodología canvas como innovación estratégica para el diseño de proyectos empresariales. Journal of science and research 2019, 4, 87–99. [Google Scholar]
92. Albertus, M.; Espinoza, M.; Fort, R. Land reform and human capital development: Evidence from Peru. Journal of Development Economics 2020, 102540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
93. Kaifi, B. A.; Noori, S. A. Organizational Behavior: A Study on Managers, Employees, and Teams. Journal of Management Policy and Practice 2011, 12, 88–97. Available online: http://www.na-businesspress.com/jmpp/kaifiweb.pdf (accessed on 13 March 2023).
94. Coloma, E. El impacto del COVID-19 en las mujeres trabajadoras del Perú. ¿Se incrementa la desigualdad y la violencia en el trabajo? Ius Et Praxis 2021, 053, 249–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
95. Tanwir, M.; Safdar, T. "The Rural Woman's Constraints to Participation in Rural Organizations, Journal of International Women's Studies 2013, 14(3), 15. 14.
96. Forstner, K. Women´s Group-based work and Rural Gender Relations the Southern Peruvian Andes. Bulletin of Latin American Research 2013, 32, 46–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
97. Pilela, Z.; Molnar, J. J. Gender and Rural Vitality: Empowerment through Women’s Community Groups*. Rural Sociology 2021, 0, 1–25. [Google Scholar]
98. Grabowska, A. Sex on the brain: Are gender-dependent structural and functional differences associated with behavior? Journal of Neuroscience Research 2017, 95, 200–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
99. Diez, A. 2000. Reforma institucional. En Desafíos del Desarrollo Rural en el Perú; Trivelli, C., von Hesse, M., Diez, A., del Castillo, L., Eds.; Consorcio de Investigación Económica y Social: Lima, Perú, 2000; pp. 35–54. Available online: https://cies.org.pe/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/dyp-02.pdf (accessed on 21 March 2023).
100. García, J. A. La educación emocional, su importancia en el proceso de aprendizaje. Revista Educación 2012, 36, 97–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
101. Nungsari, M.; Ngu, K.; Chin, J. W.; Flanders, S. The formation of youth entrepreneurial intention in an emerging economic: the interaction between psychological traits and socioeconomic factors. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies 2023, 15, 333–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
102. Kirk, P.; Shutte, A. M. Community leadership development. Community Development Journal 2004, 39, 234.251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
103. Fischer, D. Relational Leadership and Regional Development: A case study on new agriculture ventures in Uganda. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship 2019, 24, 1950010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
104. Rodríguez-Espinosa, H.; Ospina-Parra, C. E.; Ramírez-Gómez, C. J.; Toro-González, I. C.; Gallego-Lopera, A.; Piedrahita-Pérez, M. A.; Velásquez-Chica, A.; Gutiérrez-Molina, S.; Flórez-Tuta, N.; Hincapié-Echeverri, O. D.; Romero-Rubio, L. C. Lineamientos para una metodología de identificación de estilos de aprendizaje aplicables al sector agropecuario colombiano. Ciencia y Tecnología Agropecuaria 2020, 21, e1050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
105. Cameron, R.; Harrison, J. “The interrelatedness of formal, non-formal and informal learning: Evidence from labour market program participants”, Australian Journal of Adult Learning 2012, 52(2), pp. 277-309.
106. Daza, Y. F. La andragogía como fundamento pedagógico en el modelo de extensión. In Programa de formación en extensión. Orientaciones curriculares; Bernal, L., Ed.; Fundación Centro Internacional de Educación y Desarrollo Humano: Colombia, 2019; pp. 65–76. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Yaneth-Daza-Paredes/publication/356082582_Programa_de_formacion_en_extension/links/618b2248d7d1af224bcffe66/Programa-de-formacion-en-extension.pdf#page=66 (accessed on 26 March 2023).
107. Coffey, W. J. , & Polèse, M. The concept of local development: A stages model of endogenous regional growth*. Papers in Regional Science 1984, 55(1), 1–12.
108. Friedrich, K. A systematic literature review concerning the different interpretations of the role of sustainability of project management. Manag. Rev. Q 2021, 73, 31–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
109. Phélinas, P. Les effets de la formation sur l'emploi en milieu rural péruvien. Mondes en Developpement 2016, 34, 33–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
110. Devkota, S.; Ghimire, S.; Upadhyay, M. What Factors in Nepal Account for the Rural–Urban Discrepancy in Human Capital? Evidence from Household Survey Data. Economies 2021, 9, 83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
111. Guiskin, M. Situación de las juventudes rurales en América Latina y el Caribe, serie Estudios y Perspectivas - Sede subregional de la CEPAL en México, N° 181 (LC/TS.2019/124-LC/MEX/TS.2019/31). Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL): México, 2019.
112. Morley, S. Changes in rural poverty in Perú 2004-2012. Latin American Economic Review 2017, 26, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
113. Honadle, G. H.; Hannah, J P. Management performance for rural development: packaged training or capacity building. Public Administration and Development 1982, 2, 295–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
114. van den Berg, K.; Phillips, S.; Dicke, M.; Fredrix, M. Impacts of farmers field schools in the human, social, natural and financial domain: a quantitative review. Food Security 2020, 12, 1443–1459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
115. Vázquez-Barquero, A.; Rodríguez-Cohard, J. C. Endogenous development and institutions: Challenges for local development initiatives. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 2016, 34, 1135–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
116. Gemmano, C. G.; Manuti, A.; Giancaspro, M. L. “It just a matter of culture”: an explorative study on the relationship between training transfer and work performance. Journal of Workplace Learning 2022, 34, 532–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
117. Valdivieso, P. Network organizations: A review on estructural efficiency in business. Espacios 2013, 34, 16. Available online: https://www.revistaespacios.com/a13v34n07/13340716.html (accessed on 18 March 2023).
118. Morrison, T. H. Developing a regional governance index: The institutional potential of rural regions. Journal of Rural Studies 2014, 35, 101–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]